Transcript A Stakeholder Theory of the Modern Corporation

A Stakeholder Theory of the
Modern Corporation
by
R. Edward Freeman
Remember -(Milton) Friedman ≠ (Edward) Freeman
Shareholder ≠ Stakeholder
Milton (Friedman) vs. Edward (Freeman)
• Milton (Friedman)
– The only group that
has a moral claim on
the corporation is the
people who own
shares of the stock
(that is, the
shareholders).
• Edward (Freeman)
– Many groups have a
moral claim on the
corporation because
the corporation has
the potential to harm
or benefit them (call
these groups
stakeholders).
Who are these stakeholders?
• Owners (that is, the shareholders).
• The corporate managers themselves.
• The local community (and at least
sometimes a broader community –
regional, national, global).
• The customers.
• The employees.
• The suppliers.
What characterizes these
stakeholders?
• They are vital to the survival and success
of the corporation.
• Their relationship with the corporation
enables them to be benefited by the
corporation’s actions and operations.
• This relationship also makes it possible for
the corporation to harm them or to violate
their rights.
For example, the last
UAW-GM strike.
• GM obviously could not operate without a
workforce (UAW is vital to GM’s success).
• The UAW workers could receive substantial
benefits from GM – high wages, job security,
retiree benefits, etc.
• GM could substantially harm UAW workers, and
vice versa.
• So, the UAW workers were a legitimate
stakeholder group for GM, and GM consequently
had to take them into account in making its
corporate decisions.
What is Edward (Freeman’s)
argument for his theory?
• The “legal argument” – Society has substantially
limited the unrestricted pursuit of profit via laws
and regulations. This means Milton (Friedman’s)
theory is hypothetical and essentially useless.
• The “economic argument” – Milton (Friedman’s)
theory assumes there are no economic
externalities, moral hazards in the form of passalong costs, or monopolies. But all of these
really exist, so his shareholder theory is false.
So, what does Edward (Freeman’s)
theory require corporations to do?
• Corporations have to take all of the
stakeholder groups into account when
making a decision.
• But, there are many different ways to take
them into account – for example,
– Kantian ethics
– Utilitarian ethics
– Rawls’ theory about justice
Edward (Freeman’s) Kantian
example.
• Paying attention to customer’s needs →
stable business processes (sales of
products and purchases of raw materials).
• But paying attention to customer’s needs
IS a Kantian treatment of the customer as
an end rather than exploiting them as a
means only.
Edward (Freeman’s) Rawlsian
example.
• View the mutual relationships among a
corporation’s stakeholders as a set of
contracts. Then ask, “What would assure
the fairness of these?”
– Basic equality among the stakeholders in
terms of their moral rights (each “contract” is
as morally important as the others).
– Inequalities in the amount of benefits to the
stakeholder groups demonstrably raise the
level of the least well-off stakeholder group.
How do Friedman and Freeman differ in
analyzing a case?
• (Milton) Friedman says to
maximize profit a) within
the law and b) without
violating social standards.
– So, in looking at a business
decision (or analyzing a
case), identify relevant
laws and regulations – and
also identify current social
standards and opinions.
– Maximize profit without
breaking laws/regulations
AND without “disturbing”
society so much that it
decreases profits.
• (Edward) Freeman says
to a) identify stakeholder
groups and b) make a
decision that “takes them
into account.”
– So, in looking at a business
decision (or analyzing a
case), identify all
stakeholder groups.
– Identify available options
and determine the effect
they will have on the
stakeholders.
– Select and apply an ethical
theory to these options to
determine the best one.